A third of drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration are flagged for safety concerns in the years after, a Yale-led study warns.
Researchers analyzed 222 newly-approved drugs since 2001, and found 72 of them (32 percent) required new warnings to be printed on their label.
On average, it took 4.2 years for these concerns to come to light after approval.
Most of the issues are not serious enough to withdraw the drug from the market.
However, experts warn the finding highlights a serious gap in how the regulation industry handles the transition of drugs from experimental to wide-spread.
Not serious enough to withdraw from market or the regulators are just to corrupt to actually protect the people?
The main problem is the FDA and big pharma being in bed with each other. We need a law that says government regulators are banned from taking jobs in the industries they are regulating that would be a big help by forcing big pharma to produce a decent product rather than bribe government officials with cozy jobs after they retire from the government.
But the vast majority of trials involve fewer than 1,000 patients studied over a period of six months or less, making it hard to spot longer term safety issues.
Sounds about right, they are lucky if they monitor new vaccine tests for more than a month. The HPV vaccine was tested for just 15 days so the reality is we no nothing about the long term affects of these drugs until people start taking them and years later they suffer side effect or worse end up dead. That's totally unacceptable in my opinion. People need to demand better long term testing of new drugs, six months is just way to short.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4488616/1-3-FDA-approved-drugs-flagged-safety-errors.html
http://news.yale.edu/2017/05/09/new-safety-concerns-identified-1-3-fda-approved-drugs